Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Discuss all things Wigan Warriors. Comments and opinions on all aspects of the club's performance are welcome.
pedro
Posts: 4023
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:37 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by pedro » Wed May 15, 2019 11:10 am

Caboosegg wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:03 am
SJ wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 10:07 am
Looked in my book of Rules 1972 ewFallowfield edition Seems I owe Mr Hicks an. Apology secttion10 para2 covers accidental knock on If Tommy touched the ball then VR was right to disallow try.
Rule on accidental ko's needs clarification tho'. Sorry Mr Hicks!👹
And theres a issue that rule basically spoilt a brilliant play, its moments like that that make the game interesting, but that rule basically means that TL should have just left the ball on the floor and thrown his hands up to claim a knock on instead of taking advantage of his hard work.

Try vs a scrum i kow which one i prefered to watch.
means that if you want to waste time you could run with the ball and throw it at an oppositions hand to force a scrum
http://www.speedtest.net/result/1857407490.png

fozzieskem
Posts: 2809
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by fozzieskem » Wed May 15, 2019 11:33 am

All very well blaming the ref in this matter,Hicks was following the rules as they are today,like it or not he interpreted them correctly,so all the foaming I’d the mouth by the goons on tv was for naught he was right to chalk the try off.

Now that the rules is bonkers when a tackle like that IS the issue but Hicks simply isn’t to blame

Nezza Faz
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by Nezza Faz » Wed May 15, 2019 11:41 am

pedro wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:10 am
Caboosegg wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:03 am
SJ wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 10:07 am
Looked in my book of Rules 1972 ewFallowfield edition Seems I owe Mr Hicks an. Apology secttion10 para2 covers accidental knock on If Tommy touched the ball then VR was right to disallow try.
Rule on accidental ko's needs clarification tho'. Sorry Mr Hicks!👹
And theres a issue that rule basically spoilt a brilliant play, its moments like that that make the game interesting, but that rule basically means that TL should have just left the ball on the floor and thrown his hands up to claim a knock on instead of taking advantage of his hard work.

Try vs a scrum i kow which one i prefered to watch.
means that if you want to waste time you could run with the ball and throw it at an oppositions hand to force a scrum

Slight problem with that pedro, in most cases be a pen against him if he's thrown it forward into the opponent - be classed as an "intentional" forward pass which is a penalty against. But obviously rarely seen :o

User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 5191
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by Wigan_forever1985 » Wed May 15, 2019 11:59 am

But if you follow the rules to the letter isnt a drop kick a knock on?
Always be yourself - unless you can be Dan Bilzerian then ALWAYS be Dan Bilzerian!

SJ
Posts: 1200
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:46 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by SJ » Wed May 15, 2019 12:37 pm

Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:59 am
But if you follow the rules to the letter isnt a drop kick a knock on?
good point WF. The rule I referred to say if the ball is k. o'd accidentally and is kicked before the ball touches the ground or post or bar then it's play on. So if the ball is dropped intentionally and kicked then what you say appears to be the case. Like I said the issue is in need of clarification

User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 5191
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by Wigan_forever1985 » Wed May 15, 2019 12:50 pm

SJ wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 12:37 pm
Wigan_forever1985 wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:59 am
But if you follow the rules to the letter isnt a drop kick a knock on?
good point WF. The rule I referred to say if the ball is k. o'd accidentally and is kicked before the ball touches the ground or post or bar then it's play on. So if the ball is dropped intentionally and kicked then what you say appears to be the case. Like I said the issue is in need of clarification
I think youre right and there are a lot of grey areas around the rules, especially when it involves "intention" as thats a very difficult thing to prove sometimes

theres one thats bothered me for a while, we all know the chip kick can be pretty effective but it takes timely and a lot of skill to get just right. however while ive never seen it done intentionally i cant think of anything in the rules that would stop you simply throwing the ball over the defensive line and regathering yourself.

I suppose there is a risk if you dont make the catch or it hits an opposition player its a knock on but you could control it a lot better than a chip kick and also do it closer to the line with less warning.

I only raise this as i have seen this done before as part of trying to regather a stray pass and it work yet never as a preplanned move
Always be yourself - unless you can be Dan Bilzerian then ALWAYS be Dan Bilzerian!

SJ
Posts: 1200
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 4:46 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by SJ » Wed May 15, 2019 1:45 pm

The ball knocked forward. Thrown forward in the circumstances you refer to and recaught would be a knock on. See Glossery of terms. To avoid the difficulty envisaged with the drop kick. A punt would avoid that difficulty so long as the ball is dropped on the foot vertically and kicked before hitting the ground. Easier said than done. 🙄

fozzieskem
Posts: 2809
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by fozzieskem » Wed May 15, 2019 2:10 pm

What we are seeing though now is there are quite a few grey areas in the rules,open to interpretation but how can it really,I would see one thing then someone else would see it slightly differently,it is a minefield and one that without a doubt needs looking at.

But it’s not helpful the muppets on tv and yea we fans harangue the ref at any given opertunity only for a few days later when tempera have cooled to see that in this case,by the letter of the law Hicks was right,there isn’t room for common sense to be applied unless of course it’s written in the rule book.

User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 5191
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by Wigan_forever1985 » Wed May 15, 2019 2:23 pm

SJ wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 1:45 pm
The ball knocked forward. Thrown forward in the circumstances you refer to and recaught would be a knock on. See Glossery of terms. To avoid the difficulty envisaged with the drop kick. A punt would avoid that difficulty so long as the ball is dropped on the foot vertically and kicked before hitting the ground. Easier said than done. 🙄
but it wasnt a knock on here for jarrod sammut on 5mins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_u02gyTHYM
Always be yourself - unless you can be Dan Bilzerian then ALWAYS be Dan Bilzerian!

pedro
Posts: 4023
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 9:37 pm

Re: Kris Radlinski calls for changes after controversial 'no try' for Wigan Warriors

Post by pedro » Wed May 15, 2019 4:35 pm

Nezza Faz wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:41 am
pedro wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:10 am
Caboosegg wrote:
Wed May 15, 2019 11:03 am


And theres a issue that rule basically spoilt a brilliant play, its moments like that that make the game interesting, but that rule basically means that TL should have just left the ball on the floor and thrown his hands up to claim a knock on instead of taking advantage of his hard work.

Try vs a scrum i kow which one i prefered to watch.
means that if you want to waste time you could run with the ball and throw it at an oppositions hand to force a scrum

Slight problem with that pedro, in most cases be a pen against him if he's thrown it forward into the opponent - be classed as an "intentional" forward pass which is a penalty against. But obviously rarely seen :o
its not a forward pass its a knock on
http://www.speedtest.net/result/1857407490.png

Post Reply